Lowes Home Improvement Stores and their anti gun policies - Page 22
Page 22 of 23 FirstFirst ... 1220212223 LastLast
Results 211 to 220 of 228

Thread: Lowes Home Improvement Stores and their anti gun policies

  1. #211
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Houston Metro Area, Texas
    Posts
    3,004
    Private property means exactly that, if a police officer comes on my property in Texas while not investigating a crime he can be tossed, criminal trespass, if checking on a crime different deal, no warrant have a nice day and leave.

  2.   
  3. #212
    ezkl2230 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by BC1 View Post
    Please don't respond with these claims. This is complete ignorance of the law. The legal case law is so massive against what you claim that you are not understanding where your rights are drawn. I'm holding a pen. You might dearly want it to be a pencil. But the fact is, it's a pen. Education will set you free. Research the case law and reasoning on judges decisions. To keep making this claim hurts you in future posts. It expounds ignorance and lack of understanding of the law. It shows an inability separate your opinion from the law.
    No -- you're the one who can't see what is happening here.

    Those of us who contend that the Second Amendment gives us the right to defend ourselves while we are at work or out conducting business are far from ignorant of the law. To the contrary, we are painfully aware of how the law has been used to deny us our right to defend ourselves in these places. And once again, we have witnessed yet another incident where people on the job were killed or wounded because they weren't allowed to defend themselves from one deranged co-worker (Police: Minn. office shooter kills 4, then self - Yahoo! News).

    It has been argued that the Bill of Rights didn't cover everyone when it was first written. That is true. And because business people were more interested in protecting their income than protecting the rights of those who made that income possible, slavery was the law of the land until the civil war finally put an end to it. As one business owner posted to this forum, "For me the bottom line is more important than this topic. And that's how one becomes successful. Every single decision we make from morning to bedtime is based on the question "is this financially good for the company... and for me as the owner?" Another poster observed, "I'm in the money business. I'm not in the 'rights' business. Don't like it? Take your business or emplyment elsewhere. It's not negotiable." That is the attitude that kept slavery going for hundreds of years around the world in the past, and THAT is the attitude that makes the Minnesota, or Colorado, or V Tech shootings possible today. As the web site of Union Local 2544 of The National Border patrol Council, Tucson, AZ, observed regarding active shooter incidents:

    "Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows that any three of the above shootings (referring to Columbine, Virginia Tech, and the Giffords shooting - added) would have been stopped cold by an off-duty law enforcement officer or a law abiding citizen with a gun. The Fort Hood shooting would have been stopped cold by someone with a gun as well. The shooters in these situations depend on unarmed and scared victims. It gives them the power they seek. We could go on and on with examples of shootings that could have been stopped by someone with a firearm…. Calling 911 in these instances is obvious, but we all know that waiting on the arrival of uniformed law enforcement will ensure more people are killed, injured, or taken hostage" (emphasis added).
    But then something happened: the common people began to understand how their rights had been denied them. They began talking about how the rights outlined in the Bill of Rights - ALL of them - should belong to everyone. And because people began to talk, action was initiated, and eventually laws - a seemingly insurmountable number of them - were changed. THAT is what is happening here in this and other forums. People are recognizing that the law needs to be changed. It isn't about ignorance of the law, it is about a recognition that a right that exists in our Bill of Rights is being denied us simply because the government hasn't gotten around to declaring us a "protected group." It is about a recognition that the "golden rule" still exists, and that those who have the gold (the chamber of commerce and other groups that buy politicians) are still making the rules to benefit themselves at the expense of the rights of those who make it possible for them to be profitable - both employees and clients.

    I have news for you, the Civil Rights Act was intended to do only one thing: assure that certain groups of people who had experienced discrimination - the denial of their Constitutional rights - no longer experienced that discrimination. That is all. It didn't set them apart for "special" treatment, although that is how it has been interpreted, and it didn't tell the rest of us to bug off, that OUR civil rights no longer meant anything compared to the rights of the few protected groups. It was created to insure that ALL the rights of ALL the people - without exception - were protected.

    As I have said in other posts, I have been a business owner, and I am in the process of getting a new business up and running. I will have a sign like one of the following posted at the door of my business:

    Lowes Home Improvement Stores and their anti gun policies-nhe-16347_600.gif Lowes Home Improvement Stores and their anti gun policies-carry-permitted.jpg Lowes Home Improvement Stores and their anti gun policies-sign_noticecarrypermitted.jpg

    I will hunt for an insurance provider that will not require a "gun free" rider. I will be in business to both make money AND protect civil rights. The two are not mutually exclusive as some business owners on this forum apparently believe them to be.

    It begins with people talking about it - and then doing something to change it. It has happened before, despite the efforts of monied businessmen to stop it, and it can and must happen again. THAT is what scares the business owners on this forum the most; the notion that, for all of their woofing about the power of the Chamber of Commerce and the pile of precedent on their side, they could actually lose the control they now maintain. There might actually come a time when they WON'T be able to tell their employees, "I don't care WHAT you believe about the Second Amendment; if you want to work for me, you'll abide by MY understanding of the Second Amendment. And if you choose not to, so what? There are 50 others waiting for your job." Because the reality is, most of these business owners WON'T close up their businesses if this ever happens. They have bills to pay and mortgages to maintain, and families to feed. They can say what they want to now, but at that time they will grumble a bit and then get on with business. In the meantime, there is something fundamentally wrong with the idea that a business owner can prohibit those who enter his business from protecting themselves, and then when something terrible happens, as was the case in Minnesota this week, and people are injured or die, they can simply say, "Oh well, that's just the cost of doing business and protecting MY rights; screw the rest of you."

    By the way, the following is on a bank door in Chappell Hill, TX:

    Lowes Home Improvement Stores and their anti gun policies-img_4987-1.jpg

    http://www.chappellhillbank.com/online-tour/

  4. #213
    I frequent Lowes in Frankfort KY often while open carrying. Picking up more tile from Lowes again today.

    Never been harassed but have conversed with a few gun owning employees regarding various sidearms.
    If it doesn't fit, FORCE it! If it breaks then it needed to be replaced anyway.


  5. Quote Originally Posted by ezkl2230 View Post
    No -- you're the one who can't see what is happening here.

    Those of us who contend that the Second Amendment gives us the right to defend ourselves while we are at work or out conducting business are far from ignorant of the law. To the contrary, we are painfully aware of how the law has been used to deny us our right to defend ourselves in these places. And once again, we have witnessed yet another incident where people on the job were killed or wounded because they weren't allowed to defend themselves from one deranged co-worker (Police: Minn. office shooter kills 4, then self - Yahoo! News).

    It has been argued that the Bill of Rights didn't cover everyone when it was first written. That is true. And because business people were more interested in protecting their income than protecting the rights of those who made that income possible, slavery was the law of the land until the civil war finally put an end to it. As one business owner posted to this forum, "For me the bottom line is more important than this topic. And that's how one becomes successful. Every single decision we make from morning to bedtime is based on the question "is this financially good for the company... and for me as the owner?" Another poster observed, "I'm in the money business. I'm not in the 'rights' business. Don't like it? Take your business or emplyment elsewhere. It's not negotiable." That is the attitude that kept slavery going for hundreds of years around the world in the past, and THAT is the attitude that makes the Minnesota, or Colorado, or V Tech shootings possible today. As the web site of Union Local 2544 of The National Border patrol Council, Tucson, AZ, observed regarding active shooter incidents:



    But then something happened: the common people began to understand how their rights had been denied them. They began talking about how the rights outlined in the Bill of Rights - ALL of them - should belong to everyone. And because people began to talk, action was initiated, and eventually laws - a seemingly insurmountable number of them - were changed. THAT is what is happening here in this and other forums. People are recognizing that the law needs to be changed. It isn't about ignorance of the law, it is about a recognition that a right that exists in our Bill of Rights is being denied us simply because the government hasn't gotten around to declaring us a "protected group." It is about a recognition that the "golden rule" still exists, and that those who have the gold (the chamber of commerce and other groups that buy politicians) are still making the rules to benefit themselves at the expense of the rights of those who make it possible for them to be profitable - both employees and clients.

    I have news for you, the Civil Rights Act was intended to do only one thing: assure that certain groups of people who had experienced discrimination - the denial of their Constitutional rights - no longer experienced that discrimination. That is all. It didn't set them apart for "special" treatment, although that is how it has been interpreted, and it didn't tell the rest of us to bug off, that OUR civil rights no longer meant anything compared to the rights of the few protected groups. It was created to insure that ALL the rights of ALL the people - without exception - were protected.

    As I have said in other posts, I have been a business owner, and I am in the process of getting a new business up and running. I will have a sign like one of the following posted at the door of my business:

    Lowes Home Improvement Stores and their anti gun policies-nhe-16347_600.gif Lowes Home Improvement Stores and their anti gun policies-carry-permitted.jpg Lowes Home Improvement Stores and their anti gun policies-sign_noticecarrypermitted.jpg

    I will hunt for an insurance provider that will not require a "gun free" rider. I will be in business to both make money AND protect civil rights. The two are not mutually exclusive as some business owners on this forum apparently believe them to be.

    It begins with people talking about it - and then doing something to change it. It has happened before, despite the efforts of monied businessmen to stop it, and it can and must happen again. THAT is what scares the business owners on this forum the most; the notion that, for all of their woofing about the power of the Chamber of Commerce and the pile of precedent on their side, they could actually lose the control they now maintain. There might actually come a time when they WON'T be able to tell their employees, "I don't care WHAT you believe about the Second Amendment; if you want to work for me, you'll abide by MY understanding of the Second Amendment. And if you choose not to, so what? There are 50 others waiting for your job." Because the reality is, most of these business owners WON'T close up their businesses if this ever happens. They have bills to pay and mortgages to maintain, and families to feed. They can say what they want to now, but at that time they will grumble a bit and then get on with business. In the meantime, there is something fundamentally wrong with the idea that a business owner can prohibit those who enter his business from protecting themselves, and then when something terrible happens, as was the case in Minnesota this week, and people are injured or die, they can simply say, "Oh well, that's just the cost of doing business and protecting MY rights; screw the rest of you."

    By the way, the following is on a bank door in Chapel Hill, TX:

    Lowes Home Improvement Stores and their anti gun policies-img_4987-1.jpg

    Online Tour
    Your post is a very well presented case for OUR cause. In a country that is founded on a Constitution, and that is our order of law first and foremost, our "backbone" if you will, ALL the RIGHTS of everyone should be protected and enforced if necessary. No one person, group, or business, is above the law of the land. A man's home is his castle. His business isn't. At home, he can call the shots. At his business, he can't...when it comes to public law. And like the owner said "If you don't like it, take your business somewhere else". Well, THAT is exactly what the BUSINESS OWNER can do if he/she doesn't like the LAW...take the business somewhere else. Doesn't sound so good when the same words are turned around on the business owners, does it OWNERS?

    And besides, when an owner tries to tell you that YOU don't understand that HE can do whatever he wants because he owns he business, and you are ignorant for not understanding that, he is patently wrong himself. There are a multitude of laws he must follow if he wants to even open, much less run, a business. Tell the Fire Inspector, for instance, that you don't care what he says, you don't want an ugly fire extinguisher hanging on one of your business walls. Then see how long YOUR BUSINESS, where you supposedly "call the shots" stays open. LOL!!

    Carry on your fight. You are right about your stance. And comparing it to the Civil Rights Law is a proper comparison too. The ability to defend one's life and well-being is the most basic of all civil rights.

  6. #215
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Santa Fe Area, New Mexico
    Posts
    3,487
    OC or CC at Lowes both in SC and NC has never been a problem, at least for me. Of course, who knew at Lowes I was CC'ing.

    As for ezkl, I would post the "Guns are Welcome" sign. Gotta Lov that Judicious Marksmanship.
    "The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." --author and philosopher Ayn Rand (1905-1982)

  7. #216
    Quote Originally Posted by ezkl2230 View Post
    No -- you're the one who can't see what is happening here.

    Those of us who contend that the Second Amendment gives us the right to defend ourselves while we are at work or out conducting business are far from ignorant of the law. To the contrary, we are painfully aware of how the law has been used to deny us our right to defend ourselves in these places. And once again, we have witnessed yet another incident where people on the job were killed or wounded because they weren't allowed to defend themselves from one deranged co-worker (Police: Minn. office shooter kills 4, then self - Yahoo! News). etc. etc.

    This is the best post I have ever read on this subject. You are smack dab on target describing the attitudes of these business owners/employers as well as your assessment of the current laws that they egotistically tout as being so virtuous. They believe themselves to be so absolutely right about it it's maddening. Isn't it interesting how they resort to personal attacks and even name calling if you disagree with them about this? Their shrill is reminiscent of anti-gun liberals.

    I wish I could be so eloquent. May I use this in other postings and personal emails? Giving full credit of course.
    All The Best
    Gunz

  8. #217
    just about anyting in homedepot or lowes can be used as a weapon and even deadly so for them to have a policy against 'weapons' of any kind would be kind of stupid imo
    gun control is being able to hit your target

  9. #218
    ezkl2230 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Gr8gunz View Post
    This is the best post I have ever read on this subject. You are smack dab on target describing the attitudes of these business owners/employers as well as your assessment of the current laws that they egotistically tout as being so virtuous. They believe themselves to be so absolutely right about it it's maddening. Isn't it interesting how they resort to personal attacks and even name calling if you disagree with them about this? Their shrill is reminiscent of anti-gun liberals.

    I wish I could be so eloquent. May I use this in other postings and personal emails? Giving full credit of course.
    Help yourself. This is where and how the movement to take back our right begins.

  10. #219
    ezkl2230 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by GOV5 View Post
    And besides, when an owner tries to tell you that YOU don't understand that HE can do whatever he wants because he owns he business, and you are ignorant for not understanding that, he is patently wrong himself. There are a multitude of laws he must follow if he wants to even open, much less run, a business. Tell the Fire Inspector, for instance, that you don't care what he says, you don't want an ugly fire extinguisher hanging on one of your business walls. Then see how long YOUR BUSINESS, where you supposedly "call the shots" stays open. LOL!!
    I have made that very argument numerous times. The standard reply? Those laws/building codes exist to protect the groups listed in the Civil Rights Act or ADA. The Second Amendment isn't an explicitly protected right under the CRA, so you can't compare them like that. You can't compare the right to handicap accessible bathroom stalls or the prohibition of discrimination in hiring to a right to carry on the premises of a business. And most business owners still end that argument by telling me that NO ONE can tell them how to run THEIR business when, clearly, the government dictates how they may take almost every move they make!

  11. #220
    Legal or not, walking around with a firearm on your hip just makes you a target. Anti-gunners are going to target you... So will the bad guy. Let's face it, it a bad guy come into rob a place, he's going to scout out opposition and eliminate it. Take the target off your back and just carry concealed (if possible) and bypass all the drama of demanding to be right. I've carried concealed from one end of this country to the other (where it was legal for me to do so) and I have never been asked to leave any business establishment. Why? Because I don't make a point to telling them (or showing them) I'm armed. I'm just sayin'...
    Safety is something that happens between your ears, not something you hold in your hands. ~Col. Jeff Cooper

Page 22 of 23 FirstFirst ... 1220212223 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast